4.7 Article

On the number of regions of piecewise linear neural networks

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cam.2023.115667

关键词

Deep learning; Expressivity; Activation functions; Continuous and piecewise-linear functions; Splines; Convex partitions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study generalizes the concept of upper and lower bounds to estimate the number of linear regions in neural networks with arbitrary and possibly multivariate CPWL activation functions. It introduces a stochastic framework to estimate the average number of linear regions and reveals the role of depth in exponential growth of the number of regions.
Many feedforward neural networks (NNs) generate continuous and piecewise-linear (CPWL) mappings. Specifically, they partition the input domain into regions on which the mapping is affine. The number of these so-called linear regions offers a natural metric to characterize the expressiveness of CPWL NNs. The precise determination of this quantity is often out of reach in practice, and bounds have been proposed for specific architectures, including for ReLU and Maxout NNs. In this work, we generalize these bounds to NNs with arbitrary and possibly multivariate CPWL activation functions. We first provide upper and lower bounds on the maximal number of linear regions of a CPWL NN given its depth, width, and the number of linear regions of its activation functions. Our results rely on the combinatorial structure of convex partitions and confirm the distinctive role of depth which, on its own, is able to exponentially increase the number of regions. We then introduce a complementary stochastic framework to estimate the average number of linear regions produced by a CPWL NN. Under reasonable assumptions, the expected density of linear regions along any 1D path is bounded by the product of depth, width, and a measure of activation complexity (up to a scaling factor). This yields an identical role to the three sources of expressiveness: no exponential growth with depth is observed anymore.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据